VOR routes without VORs

Is it "cheating" or bad form or against regulations to plan a route based on
VORs and then fly it by GPS, particularly when the aircraft may be out of
range of the VORs at some point along its route?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Apr 15, 1:17 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Is it "cheating" or bad form or against regulations to plan a route based on
VORs and then fly it by GPS, particularly when the aircraft may be out of
range of the VORs at some point along its route?

No, it's just fine. Current regs require backup nav equipment be
aboard when navigating by GPS under IFR, but it doesn't require that
you actually use it. When VFR, it makes no difference at all.

ZikZak writes:

No, it's just fine. Current regs require backup nav equipment be
aboard when navigating by GPS under IFR, but it doesn't require that
you actually use it.

Thanks.

So if I file IFR and my route uses VORs, and at some point I'm out of range of
all the VORs on my route (but still navigating okay because of the GPS, which
just treats them as waypoints and doesn't actually need to be able to receive
the VOR signals), does that mean I'm technically illegal because I wouldn't be
able to fall back onto the VOR receivers I have aboard if the GPS failed?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
ZikZak writes:

No, it's just fine. Current regs require backup nav equipment be
aboard when navigating by GPS under IFR, but it doesn't require that
you actually use it.

Thanks.

So if I file IFR and my route uses VORs, and at some point I'm out of range of
all the VORs on my route (but still navigating okay because of the GPS, which
just treats them as waypoints and doesn't actually need to be able to receive
the VOR signals), does that mean I'm technically illegal because I wouldn't be
able to fall back onto the VOR receivers I have aboard if the GPS failed?

No, it means you have no clue how IFR flights are planned and flown.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Apr 15, 1:53 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
ZikZak writes:
No, it's just fine. Current regs require backup nav equipment be
aboard when navigating by GPS under IFR, but it doesn't require that
you actually use it.

Thanks.

So if I file IFR and my route uses VORs, and at some point I'm out of range of
all the VORs on my route (but still navigating okay because of the GPS, which
just treats them as waypoints and doesn't actually need to be able to receive
the VOR signals), does that mean I'm technically illegal because I wouldn't be
able to fall back onto the VOR receivers I have aboard if the GPS failed?

No, you're not illegal because if the GPS fails you can dead reckon to
the service volume of the next VOR, triangulate your position from
VORs that you're actually in range of, use the ADF, request vectors,
etc.

how can it be illegal to file a simulated IFR flight plan from the computer
to the desktop
and then illegal to fly a PC simulator??

does not compute(r)
B

"ZikZak" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 15, 1:53 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
ZikZak writes:
No, it's just fine. Current regs require backup nav equipment be
aboard when navigating by GPS under IFR, but it doesn't require that
you actually use it.

Thanks.

So if I file IFR and my route uses VORs, and at some point I'm out of
range of
all the VORs on my route (but still navigating okay because of the GPS,
which
just treats them as waypoints and doesn't actually need to be able to
receive
the VOR signals), does that mean I'm technically illegal because I
wouldn't be
able to fall back onto the VOR receivers I have aboard if the GPS failed?

No, you're not illegal because if the GPS fails you can dead reckon to
the service volume of the next VOR, triangulate your position from
VORs that you're actually in range of, use the ADF, request vectors,
etc.

ZikZak wrote:
On Apr 15, 1:17 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Is it "cheating" or bad form or against regulations to plan a route based on
VORs and then fly it by GPS, particularly when the aircraft may be out of
range of the VORs at some point along its route?

No, it's just fine. Current regs require backup nav equipment be
aboard when navigating by GPS under IFR, but it doesn't require that
you actually use it. When VFR, it makes no difference at all.


There is no such requirement if you have a TSO-C146 GPS.

On Apr 15, 7:03 pm, Ron Natalie wrote:
ZikZak wrote:
On Apr 15, 1:17 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Is it "cheating" or bad form or against regulations to plan a route based on
VORs and then fly it by GPS, particularly when the aircraft may be out of
range of the VORs at some point along its route?

No, it's just fine. Current regs require backup nav equipment be
aboard when navigating by GPS under IFR, but it doesn't require that
you actually use it. When VFR, it makes no difference at all.

There is no such requirement if you have a TSO-C146 GPS.

Correct, I meant to say "navigating by most GPSs."

Mxsmanic wrote:
Is it "cheating" or bad form or against regulations to plan a route based on
VORs and then fly it by GPS, particularly when the aircraft may be out of
range of the VORs at some point along its route?

IFR: yes
VFR: no

But why would anyone do that unless you are talking about using GPS
to get from VOR to VOR?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

But why would anyone do that unless you are talking about using GPS
to get from VOR to VOR?

That's what I'm talking about. I set the route up using VORs, but I actually
fly it by GPS. The GPS doesn't care if the VORs are actually in range,
because it just navigates to waypoints that are coincident with the VOR
locations. This means that I could be completely out of range of any of the
VORs and still navigate ... unless the GPS fails, in which case I'm out of
luck, since I can't tune the VORs if I'm out of range.

That's why I wondered if it was cheating. If I understand correctly, then,
I'm not allowed to do this if I'm IFR (because I can't fall back on the VOR
receivers?), but I can do it if I'm VFR, at my own risk.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.